MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036796239 · doi:10.1063/1.1367897

Surface electronic structure of plasma-treated indium tin oxides

2001· article· en· W2036796239 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied Physics Letters · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicZnO doping and properties
Canadian institutionsXerox (Canada)University of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsX-ray photoelectron spectroscopyWork functionIndium tin oxideBand bendingBinding energyFermi levelIndiumPlasmaTinElectronic structureMaterials scienceAnalytical Chemistry (journal)Atomic physicsBand gapElectronic band structureChemistryCondensed matter physicsLayer (electronics)NanotechnologyComputational chemistryOptoelectronicsNuclear magnetic resonancePhysicsMetallurgyElectron

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) has been used to study the electronic structures of indium tin oxide (ITO) surfaces treated by O+, Ar+, and NHx+ plasmas. The XPS data show that there is a significant change in core level energies (In 3d5/2 O 1s, and Sn 3d5/2), in donor concentration (Sn4+), in valence band maximums (VBM), and in work functions on ITO surfaces being treated by O+ and NHx+ plasmas, compared with that of virgin and Ar+ plasma treated surfaces. Based on these experimental data, a surface band-bending theory is proposed. The theory explains that when Fermi energy of the plasma-treated surface is shifted towards the middle of the band gap: core levels will shift their energies to lower binding energies, VBM will bend upward, and work function will increase, as observed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.574

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.194 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it